FMHU2000 Assignment 4 – Peer and self-
review checklist
Aim
 The human health research aim is clearly stated
 Brief background literature has been presented that justifies the aim (explains why the study
is being conducted, including all variables included in the aim)
Design
 The research design is clearly described (e.g. cross-sectional or longitudinal, experimental or
observational, qualitative or qualitative, if experimental whether there is randomisation or a
control/comparison group – strongly recommend not proposing an experimental study)
 The design is appropriate to exactly achieve the study aim
 Includes brief explanation for research design choice (may not be needed for all methods)
 The resources required are feasible for an honours project
 The study is feasible within an honours year
 A timeline or gantt chart is presented with realistic time allocated for each activity
Data collection
 Statement around ethics approval included
 Informed consent addressed
 Inclusion (and as required exclusion) criteria clear
 Inclusion and exclusion criteria appropriate to the study aim, with some explanation for
criteria chosen if required
 Recruitment method described in detail and feasible for the target sample
 If relevant, explanation for how participants will be screened for participation based on
inclusion criteria, including relevant valid tools if required
 Data collection tools/instruments/questions address the study aim
 Data collection tools/instruments/questions are appropriate for use with study participants
 If quantitative, data collection tools are valid and reliable and references have been included
 If qualitative, questions are comprehensible, manageable, appropriate and safe for study
participants
 A copy of questions or surveys are included in the proposal such as in the appendix
 References have been included for any published questionnaires or data collection methods
or tools
 If experimental design (this is not recommended unless it’s a brief experiment) then the
intervention and any comparison conditions should be clearly described in relation to the
literature with references
 Explanation is given for data collection choices
Data analysis
 Analysis strategy needs to meet the study aim
 If software is going to be used as part of analysis, this should be specified
 If quantitative: need to specify what statistical tests will be undertaken which with variables.
Note that you don’t need to know how to undertake these tests.
 If qualitative: specify the type of qualitative analysis, consider having more than one person
coding the data and consider reflexivity
 A reference is included for analysis methods
Strengths and limitations
 Strengths should be specific to this study’s design, sample and data collection methods.
Making general statements such as “small sample” or “not generalisable to all University
students” will not yield high marks.
 Strengths should be specific to the study’s methods. Again general statements such as
saying it’s qualitative or quantitative is not a specific strength which will yield high marks.
 If there are biases in the methods, name the type of bias (e.g. recall bias) and if appropriate
describe the direction of bias, possibly based on previous studies.
Presentation and referencing
 References are included for all factual statements that are not your original ideas or design
 Every paper on the reference list meets APA 6th or 7th style
 The research proposal is clearly structured with subheadings as needed
 Expression, grammar and spelling are correct
 The proposal is 1500 words (with 10% leeway) not including appendices or references
 Turnitin similarity index has been checked, and any passages with high similarity to other
work rewritten as needed